Alexandria council approves first reading of policing-auditor ordinance after subcommittee compromise

Alexandria City Council on first reading approved changes to the city—s ordinance governing the Independent Policing Auditor and the Independent Community Policing Review Board, moving the measure to a public hearing for final action.

The measure follows three publicly noticed subcommittee meetings led by Vice Mayor Bagley and Councilman K. Aguirre that included the auditor—s office, the city attorney—s office and members of the review board. The subcommittee recommended a process to resolve an impasse if the board votes to pursue an investigation that the auditor declines: the board—s vote would be docketed to the full council and council would decide whether the auditor must undertake the investigation. The subcommittee—s proposal also limits the review board—s subpoena authority to tangible evidence such as body-worn camera footage, doorbell or security-camera video, photographs and documents; it does not create a general power to compel individuals to testify.

Councilmembers described the compromise as intended to preserve the auditor—s independence while giving the review board a public escalation path when a majority of its members disagree with the auditor—s decision. Councilman K. Aguirre, a subcommittee member, said, "I feel that it has a good set of checks and balances and, involvement from the public and visibility and transparency." Vice Mayor Bagley and Aguirre said the goal was to let the board get to work on policy review and prevent repeated operational impasses.

Council voted 6-1 to pass the ordinance on first reading and to docket the item for a public hearing at the council—s next scheduled public meeting. A proposed Scrivener—s correction to clarify board-review language was also included in the ordinance package. Councilmembers debated, but did not adopt, an amendment that would have expanded subpoena authority to compel testimony; the motion to amend failed to gain the support of the motion—s sponsors.

The ordinance as written preserves the auditor—s role as an employee of the council and retains legal limits on compelled testimony for government employees (Garrity protections). The subcommittee recommended the limited subpoena duces tecum approach as consistent with national civilian-oversight practice and to avoid legal conflicts while ensuring the board can obtain documentary and video evidence relevant to investigations.

The council—s action was limited to first reading; the council will hold a public hearing before taking final action.